ISU86
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 1,366
Took a look at the NCAA Team Sheets through 2/3. It listed the following six rantings per school:
BPI (Basketball Power Index)
KPI (Key Performance Indicator)
NET (NCAA Evaluation Tool)
Pom (Pomeroy)
Sag (Sagarin)
SOR (Strength Of Record, although each school's listed value is 0)
The RPI (Rating Percentage Index) is nowhere to be found.
The difference in the results among them were as follows:
| MVC | DI | | | | | | |
| W- L | W- L | BPI | KPI | NET | Pom | Sag | SOR | AVG
==== | ===== | ===== | === | === | === | === | === | === | =======
LU | 7- 3 | 13- 9 | 103 | 138 | 134 | 136 | 103 | 0 | 122.800
IlSU | 7- 3 | 13- 9 | 193 | 134 | 168 | 165 | 142 | 0 | 160.400
DU | 6- 4 | 15- 6 | 135 | 83 | 137 | 114 | 122 | 0 | 118.200
SIU | 5- 5 | 12-11 | 156 | 158 | 155 | 162 | 143 | 0 | 154.800
MSU | 5- 5 | 10-12 | 160 | 193 | 164 | 163 | 166 | 0 | 169.200
UNI | 5- 5 | 8-13 | 211 | 159 | 191 | 203 | 182 | 0 | 189.200
VU | 5- 5 | 10-11 | 189 | 190 | 193 | 217 | 184 | 0 | 194.600
UE | 4- 6 | 8-13 | 222 | 189 | 181 | 181 | 187 | 0 | 192.000
InSU | 3- 7 | 9-11 | 224 | 157 | 189 | 201 | 167 | 0 | 187.600
BU | 3- 7 | 10-12 | 209 | 207 | 206 | 216 | 186 | 0 | 204.800
==== | ===== | ===== | === | === | === | === | === | === | =======
Avg | 5- 5 | 11-11 | 180 | 161 | 172 | 176 | 158 | 0 | 169.360
I meant to pull RPI as of that date, just to see the variance from the old ("easy to be manipulated" by the non-Power Six) standard to the new (modern) ones.
I am curious as to everyone's opinion, especially those who tend to analyze the numbers more critically, as to the pros and cons of each one, and whether the NET is indeed a better evaluator?
NOTE: I also find it interesting the NET is the NCAA's gold standard although no one independently has stated that the calculations are indeed accurate (just Google (who helped develop) and NCAA saying yes, they are correct, trust us).
Finally, here is a link to the Team Sheets if you have never seen them before - https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats%20Library/NET%20Team%20Sheets%20-%20Games%20through%20Feb.%203,%202019.pdf
BPI (Basketball Power Index)
KPI (Key Performance Indicator)
NET (NCAA Evaluation Tool)
Pom (Pomeroy)
Sag (Sagarin)
SOR (Strength Of Record, although each school's listed value is 0)
The RPI (Rating Percentage Index) is nowhere to be found.
The difference in the results among them were as follows:
| MVC | DI | | | | | | |
| W- L | W- L | BPI | KPI | NET | Pom | Sag | SOR | AVG
==== | ===== | ===== | === | === | === | === | === | === | =======
LU | 7- 3 | 13- 9 | 103 | 138 | 134 | 136 | 103 | 0 | 122.800
IlSU | 7- 3 | 13- 9 | 193 | 134 | 168 | 165 | 142 | 0 | 160.400
DU | 6- 4 | 15- 6 | 135 | 83 | 137 | 114 | 122 | 0 | 118.200
SIU | 5- 5 | 12-11 | 156 | 158 | 155 | 162 | 143 | 0 | 154.800
MSU | 5- 5 | 10-12 | 160 | 193 | 164 | 163 | 166 | 0 | 169.200
UNI | 5- 5 | 8-13 | 211 | 159 | 191 | 203 | 182 | 0 | 189.200
VU | 5- 5 | 10-11 | 189 | 190 | 193 | 217 | 184 | 0 | 194.600
UE | 4- 6 | 8-13 | 222 | 189 | 181 | 181 | 187 | 0 | 192.000
InSU | 3- 7 | 9-11 | 224 | 157 | 189 | 201 | 167 | 0 | 187.600
BU | 3- 7 | 10-12 | 209 | 207 | 206 | 216 | 186 | 0 | 204.800
==== | ===== | ===== | === | === | === | === | === | === | =======
Avg | 5- 5 | 11-11 | 180 | 161 | 172 | 176 | 158 | 0 | 169.360
I meant to pull RPI as of that date, just to see the variance from the old ("easy to be manipulated" by the non-Power Six) standard to the new (modern) ones.
I am curious as to everyone's opinion, especially those who tend to analyze the numbers more critically, as to the pros and cons of each one, and whether the NET is indeed a better evaluator?
NOTE: I also find it interesting the NET is the NCAA's gold standard although no one independently has stated that the calculations are indeed accurate (just Google (who helped develop) and NCAA saying yes, they are correct, trust us).
Finally, here is a link to the Team Sheets if you have never seen them before - https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats%20Library/NET%20Team%20Sheets%20-%20Games%20through%20Feb.%203,%202019.pdf